Which processor is better? (Quicksilver 2001)

Hello! I recently upgraded my quicksilver 2001 733 MHZ to a OWC Extreme Mercury 1.2 Ghz processor (2 MB L3, Oc'd to 1.47 Ghz). I recently have come across the opportunity to aquire a Apple stock Dual 800Mhz processor for about the same price. My questions is which is better? I am running Tiger and intend on running Leopard when it is released. I don't use classic at all.

Hi
All other things being equal, most benchmarks show a dual processor G4 is around 40% faster than a single processor running at the same clock speed, mainly due to the shared system bus. This would make the dual 800MHz roughly equivalent to a single 1.2GHz.
The OWC web site for their 1.467-1.5GHz G4 upgrade has some benchmarks comparing it to the Apple stock processors (scroll down to the bottom):
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Computing/MEG42M1500/
This also seems to show their single 1.5GHz upgrade is faster than the stock dual 800MHz. In fact, in the Photoshop benchmark used, it's almost identical to the stock dual 1GHz.

Similar Messages

Which processor is better i5 3230M or i5 4200U?

Which is the better/faster processor of the two listed?

Hi,
Do you trust the tech guys or the salesmen when talking about technology ? The tech guys who did the review know what they are talking about. Many salesmen/women are good but first of all they look at the buyers to see what the buyers can afford then they will do whatever they can do to get to buyer pockets. Cars, Houses ..... salesmen/women they graduated from the same class.
Regards.
BH
**Click the KUDOS thumb up on the left to say 'Thanks'**
Make it easier for other people to find solutions by marking a Reply 'Accept as Solution' if it solves your problem.

Which Processor is Better?

Im debating between getting a fully upgraded MacBook Pro Retina 13" or 15" with no upgrades. Which of these is better for general use, light gaming, and a little video editing? 13" - 3.0GHz Dual-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.5GHz or 15" - 2.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.4GHz?

It is dependent how an application is written. If the application can take advantage of all the available cores, the 4 core CPU will execute the data faster. than a dual core If not, the the CPU speed will be the determinant. There will be instances where a dual core CPU will perform the same or even faster than a 4 core CPU.
Given a choice, I would opt for the 4 core CPU if possible since most resource hungry programs are written with that factor in mind.
Ciao.

Which processor is better Sempron mobile or turion mobile

I just bought a AMD Sempron Mobile 64 3300+ 2GHz S754
and my current is AMD Turion Mobile 64 ML-34 1.8GHz~
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Those two are pretty close. The Turion is meant for laptops, so if you have the Sempron in now, you're possibly looking at higher temps, without a lotta performance increase. That's from the quick glance around google, though.
If you like my post, or solution to your issue/question, go ahead and click on the little star by my name and/or accept the post as the Solution. It makes me happy.
I'm NOT an employee of Best Buy, or Geek Squad, though I did work as an Agent for a year 5 years ago. None of my posts are to be taken as the official stance that Best Buy will take on your situation. My advice is just that, advice.
Unfortunately, that's the bad luck of any electronic, there's going to be bad Apples... wait that's a horrible pun.

Which is the better processor?

Hi, I've been looking at different cpu benchmarks but some are saying different things. Which is the better processor adobe premiere pro and after effects cs6? Intel core i5 3210M or AMD A8 4500M?

The best benchmark site for Premiere Pro is http://ppbm5.com/
If you are going to edit HiDef you need an i7 or for standard def video at least an i5
The AMD lacks some of the special firmware instructions that PPro uses, so will always be slower than Intel
If you are looking at a laptop, read http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1069742
-and http://forums.adobe.com/message/4578948

In Praise of the Quicksilver 2001 - 867 MHz

Yes, I have newer machines but this one has been working very, very well for over six years and I decided that I was not going to let it go and not give it the Leopard treatment. I find it amazing how well it is working with all the current system updates, a process that would cripple any older PC. I was a little concerned to find that now this machine is at the bottom of the Leopard food chain, but I did a backup on an external if I had to find my way back to Tiger.
Over the course of time I made some changes. I swapped out the 32 MB ATI Graphics card for a 128 MB model three years ago (Core Image as software though); I swapped out the 60 GB hard drive with a 120 MB model (largest this machine can take); and I added a PCI (SATA) card that allowed me to install a 250 MB internal as well. I also added an Airport (not extreme) Card to connect to the local network. The machine was built with 1.12 GB of RAM.
The installation seemed to go well, about an hour or so overall (I believe this machine has a 4x DVD read). Of course I had the issue with the Login based on 10.1 or earlier and found this right after my login after the installation. I had to do a new keychain, but (although a little inconvenient) it was fairly easy to do.
The first thing I noticed is that the icons for the PCI card connected drives had changed. Before they looked like the main hard drive, now they are orange and are similar to the FireWire attached drives. Everything seems faster than Tiger, and that is quite impressive on an over six year old machine. Safari is snappier than ever. Mail is fast as well. I don't miss the Spotlight delay while typing at all. Quick Look and the additions to viewing files in the Finder work fine and are very useful.
My menu bar is not transparent (not enough GPU power?), so for some detractors this may be a good thing, but it doesn't detract from the use at all. I'm a left-side dock person and I liked the original design that looked like when it was on the bottom, but the current configuration is OK and the lights for active programs are very easy to see. It seems to be using up more RAM than previously, but I'll have to keep watching that and see if it's overall or just certain things.
Overall my rating of this effort is a big success, and I'm sure I'd find it harder and harder to live without Leopard each day if I did not upgrade this machine. I'm not expecting this machine to act like a top of the line model, but with it's new spots, this mature machine has a lot of life left in it!
Some things I've tried so far (not in great detail, just briefly):
Photoshop CS seems to work.
Filemaker 8.5 seems to work.
Rise of Nations seems to work (maybe a tad slower in some respects, but barely noticeable)
Word seemed to work, although it seemed a bit cranky when initially highlighting text and moving windows.
Still bonding with Stacks, seems useful but requires some mindset adjustment, but it is faster than having the Application Folder in the Dock and holding it down for a menu of the contents. It would be nicer if you just saw a folder though and not the first application icon in the dock.
Spaces are definitely Cool!
Preview (4.0) has an odd crash after adjusting colors and trying to save
Disk Utility (11.0) takes a while to repair permissions and only give the rotating status bar while doing so.
So here are some thoughts from the bottom edge of the Leopard territory -- and they are good! And I still have a lot of testing to do yet.

Well, it's been a month with Leopard and I like it very much, but on this machine I not quite "sold" as of yet. I'm hoping future updates round off the rough edges and put the past spark into all aspects of the machine.
I really like Spaces, CoverFlow and QuickLook.
I really don't like the Preview Crash, Disk Utility Speed and Indication, Hunger for RAM, and the "Little Stall".
The Preview crash still happens when adjusting and trying to save, but this is happening among a large number of different machines so it may be with the GPU and Leopard coding.
Disk Utility still takes longer than Tiger in repairing permissions and the graphical indicator of the task is still not fully corrected yet.
RAM seems to be more of an issue than it ever was with Tiger. I've got 1.125 GB well within the requirement, but at times it seems to get taken up more frequently than under Tiger. While running Tiger I never had to check what was using what RAM with Activity Monitor. It seems that more stays active with Leopard as with Tiger the active was always somewhere between 25% to 40% of RAM, and the inactive was at least that much or more, but active would slim down and inactive (less yellow than blue - on Activity Monitor standard colors) would increase, but never any slowdowns with this scheme. With the same amount of applications running in Leopard, the yellow (active) will work it's way up to half with very little blue (inactive). Over time if you leave the machine on and sleep more RAM will kept getting taken up. From my observations it seems to be Safari, which starts out at about 50-80 MB for five tabs, but overtime and surfing it will balloon up to over 300 MB and it makes more sense to quit and restart Safari to get back more RAM. I thought it might be related to Spaces, but I turned it off and the RAM usage was the same. I always expected Leopard to use more of the RAM, but I think there must be some optimizations that can be done to make better use of what is available and to curtail Safari's thirst for memory. Make no mistake, Safari is a great browser; and is my number one choice.
The "Little Stall" (using a Seinfeld-esque slant at naming) is also a result of Leopard I'd like to see the last of. While running the new screen savers "Shell" or "Arabesque" or using any of the iTunes Visualizer (including the original), the effect will run for about three seconds then they're be a "little stall" of about half of a second and it will continue for three seconds and on. It almost seems like there is some disk usage or caching involved and seems odd as I have 128 MB of Video RAM (ATI Radeon 9000 Pro). Could it be that even with 128 MB that Core Image is being done as software and not hardware is causing the the "Little Stall"? I find that hard to believe that this is how the effects are supposed to work on a machine with a non-programable GPU, since there are a number of machines that are well within Leopards requirements that have non-programable GPU's. How many iBooks and other machines are out there with 32 MB GPU's of the same type? I'm hoping that future updates will bring us updated ATI drivers that allow Leopard to take advantage of the same things Tiger could without issue.
All that said, I have Tiger on a backup drive with a complete backup of the drive when I did the upgrade, and I booted up in it the other day to update my Mail if I decide to take this machine back to Tiger and concede on Leopard. As I was working in Tiger, it was as good as I remembered, but in the end I was really missing some of the Leopard features. So I'm keeping Leopard (updating Tiger mail as a fail safe) and hoping future updates will take the Leopard experience on the Quicksilver 2001 - 867 MHz to where it needs to be.
So in the end, I'm a bit torn between what I had, what I have, and keeping hope for what I will get in the end. I'm a few tweaks away from true happiness, but the wait is excruciating.... I know I'm not alone, so let's hope the tweaks and fixes come fast and furious.

Which is a better performer, the macbook air or the mac mini?

Which one performs better, the late 2013 macbook air (standard configuration: 4GB RAM, dual core i5 1,3 Ghz CPU) or the mac mini core quad core i7, 4GB RAM with a regular hard disc?

LowLuster
No Air model can be as fast as a Mini with a quad core i7 CPU. Can't happen.
I didnt solicit your opinion, and it IS a fact, .....skilled users here on this board will and DO TELL other users OFTEN that:
"outside of processor core use (video/ photo etc.) you will NOT NOTICE ANY DIFFERENCE on X computer vs. slower Y computer"
I have a 8 month old QUAD core Mac Mini and it is , as I said above "noticeably not ONE BIT" faster than my current 2013 macbook Air with 8gig.
My quad core came with 4gig of RAM as I recall, I immediately tossed in 16gig.
Notice the word "noticeably"
Your subjective hyperbole aside, you are wrong......., those above yourself and myself (point wise,...as Ogel has stated, Clinton has stated, and others) state this fact very often regarding ---"outside of processor core use (video/ photo etc.) you will NOT NOTICE ANY DIFFERENCE on X computer vs. slower Y computer"
Its not my opinion, its a fact, namely additionally that I stated "noticeably" - "my quad core mac mini on MOST EVERYTHING (which is most things since 'most things' are NOT photo and video editing) is not "noticeably" ONE BIT faster than my Macbook Air.
"most things" people do (most people) on their computer does NOT involve photo and video editing (photoshop pro, final cut pro etc etc)
This is a fact, that AS SUCH most people WILL NOT notice any difference in general computer use between a quad core mac mini (for example) and a entry level macbook Air. (SSD vs. HD speeds aside). Nobody is going to notice faster youtube, or Word use, or websurfing, Acrobat Pro, Quicktime play, general APPS that havent changed much in 7 years.
Dont curse on these family boards please, its uncouth.
Peace

Which Mac is better for making music?

I need macbook for making music, but which one is better macbook?
Macbook 13.3''
2.16Ghz C2D
13.3" LCD
2GB DDR2
80GB HDD
SuperDrive
Or this Powerbook
17-inch TFT widescreen display with 1680x1050 resolution
1.67GHz processor
2GB memory (DDR2)
120GB hard drive
Slot-load SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVDRW/CD-RW)
ATI Mobility Radeon graphics card
Full-size, backlit keyboard
Gigabit Ethernet
USB 2.0 and FireWire 400 & 800
This powerbook is older but it has bigger display, which one is good for Garageband, i would put Leopard on it

The Macbook 13.3.
I use it to make music on garageband and many other softwares its the one I suggest. Beware of the fan problem upon updating to 10.6.8.

Which Laptop is better? HP DV7-4177NR OR DV7-6B55DX?

Okay I need to buy a new laptop ASAP! Can you guys help me and tell me which one is better?
Both laptops are refurbished.
DV7 4177NR :http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-PAVILION-DV7-4177NR-AMD-PHENOM-II-DUAL-CORE-N640-2-9GHZ-/170872977978?pt=...
DV7-6B55DX :http://www.cowboom.com/product/1033798
Okay well both laptops seem good to me but which one is better?
The 4177NR features a AMD Phenom II Dual Core N640 @2.9GHZ
6GB DDR3 RAM
640GB HD
BluRay
17.3 INCH Screen
Graphic :ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470
Sound :Beats Audio and HP Triple Bass Reflex Subwoofer
The 6B55DX offers
2nd gen intel core i5 -2430 M processor 2.40GHZ with turbo boost to 3 GHZ
8GB Ram
Intel HD graphics 3000
Beats Audio
etc.
So which one is better for games? Which one has less problems and wont cause me to spend lots of money to fix in the future?
I can get the 4177nr for 475 with 10 bucks cash back
and i can get the other one for around 520.

The Intel laptops is probably a better choice. That Radeon HD 5470 is not much powerful and the integrated Intel chip will be better as it uses the advantage of the Sandy Bridge Core i5 processor. However, there are better machines for games than these ones..
Dv6-7000 /Full HD/Core i5-3360M/GF 650M/Corsair 8GB/Intel 7260AC/Samsung Pro 256GB
Testing - HP 15-p000
HP Touchpad provided by HP
Currently on Debian Wheeze
*Please, help other users with the same issue by marking your solved topics as "Accept as Solution"*

Which processor is faster?

Can someone please help me decide between the Intel core 2 SU 7300 and the Intel Core 2 T6600. Which processor is faster and better suited for casual gaming, entertainment and photo editing?
Solved!
Go to Solution.

SlimJim77 - They are both Dual core processors. The SU 7300 is a ULV or a Ultra Low Voltage processor. SU 7300 spec sheet here http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=42791. T6600 spec sheet here http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=37255&processor=T6600&spec-codes=SLGF5. notice the biggest ifferences are in the clock speeds 1.3Ghz for the SU7300 and 2.2Ghz for the T6600. I myself would prefer the T6600 over the SU7300. Because in the few revews I can find of the SU7300 they are good procs for long battery life but they are a bit weak on the performance side.

I am going to buy a macbook pro for grade 12, and I need to know wheather I should get a macbook pro or a macbook pro retina. If someone could tell me (in a very simple way) which one is,better for me and why, I would be ever so apprreciative.

I am going to buy a macbook pro for grade 12, and I need to know wheather I should get a macbook pro or a macbook pro retina. If someone could tell me (in a very simple way) which one is,better for me and why, I would be ever so apprreciative.

Why do you need a expensive MacBook Pro?
Your attending high school and unless everyone else is rich also your likely going to be a target by the more poorer students for theft or damage to the machine.
You could keep it home, but if you need it for class then your exposed again.
Also at that age your not very careful yet, a MacBook Pro is a expensive and easily damaged machine.
Unless your made of money and so are others at your school, I would recommned a low profile, just does the job cheap Windows PC.
If it dies, gets lost, stolen or damaged because of your inexperince handling senstivie electronics then it's no big deal.
You can buy a Mac later on when your sure you have a need for it, currently there isn't much advantage of owning a Mac compared to a PC, they do just about the same things now, one just looks prettier than the other.
Since 95% of the world uses Windows PC's your going to have to install Windows on the Mac in order to keep your skills up there or be unemployed, so it's a extra headache and expense.
good luck

Which browser is better to use as an option to Safari and how do you download it?

Which browser is better to use as an option to Safari and how do you safely download it? Thanks

I use Firefox when a site doesn't work well with Safari. Some people like Google's Chrome, but I find it too instrusive and do not trust Google's security. You can download Firefox from firefox.com.
Regards.

I am looking for macbookpro mid 2010 HDD exact specs so that i can upgrade it to 1TB. PLEASE HELP ME about OEM apple brand or which one is better.Thanks

I am looking for macbookpro mid 2010 HDD exact specs so that i can upgrade it to 1TB. PLEASE HELP ME about OEM apple brand or which one is better?.Thanks

clintonfrombirmingham Your information is not correct.
http://kb.sandisk.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/8142/~/difference-between-sata-i,- sata-ii-and-sata-iii
I have a sata II samsung 5400 rpm and i am only able to transfer at 85 read right speed.
On my main drive sata III ocz agility 3 ssd i get 120 mb read and 180 write.
Neither of these come close to the 300 mb promised. So it wont matter if he got sata II or III
The speed came from Blackmagic Disk Speed Test

Which solution for better perfomance?

I'm writing java application based on XML. This application have to store very large XML file into DB (XML file is about 1000MB large). My solution is to divide it into smaller (100MB) parts (because of memory resources) and store it in DB. I have one XMLType table based on object-relational storage (so at the end there will be 10 rows each of 100MB size).
XML file looks like:
<students>
<student id="1">
...// 5 nested elements or collections of elements
</student>
<student id="2">
</student>
<student id="3">
</student>
</students>
</students>
Now I need to get java object Student which correponds to <student>element. My solution is to select whole <student> element and use JAXB to convert it to Java object. While solving a problem with selecting <student> element (just in case you know a solution for my another problem: How to select specific element from a XML document using JDBC? another question raised in my mind.
Which solution has better performance when I don't need to select relational data but I'm interested in xml fragment?
1) Use object-relational storage
2) Use CLOB storage
As I figured out object-relational storage is better for selecting data like student name. But is it also better when I need whole xml fragment?
Isn't my solution completely wrong? I'm quite a newbie in XML DB so it's possible that I missed better solution.
Thanks for any advice

I don't know which version you have regarding 11g, but probably in this case I would go for a table with a XMLType Binary XML column. To make xpath and other statements perform use Structured or Unstructured XMLIndexes to support your queries. The following has worked for far smaller XML documents but the millions we used were good for a total of >> 1 TB total storage size...
CREATE TABLE XMLTEST_DATA
(    "ID" NUMBER(15,0),
      "DOC" "SYS"."XMLTYPE"
) SEGMENT CREATION IMMEDIATE
NOCOMPRESS NOLOGGING
TABLESPACE "XML_DATA"
XMLTYPE COLUMN "DOC" STORE AS SECUREFILE BINARY XML
(TABLESPACE "XML_DATA"
NOCOMPRESS KEEP_DUPLICATES)
-- XMLSCHEMA "http://www.XMLTEST.com/Schema1.0.xsd"
-- ELEMENT "RECORD"
DISALLOW NONSCHEMA
PARTITION BY RANGE(id)
(PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_01 VALUES LESS THAN (100000000) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
,PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_02 VALUES LESS THAN (200000000) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
,PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_03 VALUES LESS THAN (300000000) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
,PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_04 VALUES LESS THAN (400000000) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
,PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_05 VALUES LESS THAN (500000000) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
,PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_06 VALUES LESS THAN (600000000) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
,PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_07 VALUES LESS THAN (700000000) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
,PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_08 VALUES LESS THAN (800000000) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
,PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_09 VALUES LESS THAN (900000000) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
,PARTITION XMLTEST_DATA_PART_MAX VALUES LESS THAN (MAXVALUE) TABLESPACE "XML_DATA" NOCOMPRESS
CREATE INDEX test_xmlindex on XMLTEST_data (doc) indextype is xdb.xmlindex
LOCAL
parameters ('GROUP PARENTINFO_GROUP
             XMLTable test_cnt_tab_ParentInfo
            ''/RECORD/ParentInfo''
            COLUMNS
             GroupingID01 VARCHAR2(4000) PATH ''Parent/GroupingID'',
             GroupingID02 VARCHAR2(4000) PATH ''Parent/Parent/GroupingID''
          ');

I would like to buy am Ipad for my nephew. Which one is better to play games, ipad or ipad mini

I would like to buy an ipad for my nephew. Which one is better, ipad or ipad mini? He wants to play games, and put lots of app.

Probably the full iPad, because it has a better graphics card. The larger screen helps too.

Which processor is better? (Quicksilver 2001)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for